Search results

Yes, he says it to the saved Acts adhering saints, not Acts skipping sinners and Bible teachers. It is an Epistle(letter) to saved saints you quoted, not an alternative to the Acts 2:38 salvation plan.

Who is the Epistle of Romans written to?... 6 Among whom are ye also the called of Jesus Christ: 7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ. 8 First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all...

Case in point. For saints only... 2 For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries. 3 But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort. 4 He that...

Amen!

Acts shows us what the Apostles did. We follow them exactly in doctrine and experience. We don't practice skipping Acts and reading Romans to sinners, nor did the Acts saints. The qualifications to read Romans, etc., are to obey Acts 2:38. Then you are officially qualified to read the epistles...

You are an Acts skipper sir.

You need it.

I think you got baptized in the titles too many times. You must be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ to obtain remission of sins, not the titles.

I did..... they were both trippy. They debunk Jesus and Peter.

If someone does not believe they will not be baptized. Jesus is smart enough to figure that out, right?

Does not say that. It explicitly says "...and is baptized shall be saved".

As a born again believer, I practice that often as possible as an affirmation of my faith. Don't you?

Here is how to get a scripture to harmonize itself... 16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. 38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall...

That was written to folks that were already saved and baptized. This was written to affirm the church in Rome's faith. I think you knew that, correct?

No, Peter said "be baptized for the remission of sins", not, 'repent for the remission of sins". You destroyed Acts 2:38.... 38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy...

You, as I was, were unwillingly baptized as an unrepented unbelieving infants. The command is to believe and repent to be qualified to be baptized for the remission of our sins(saved). We can't use the RCC as an excuse not to be baptized as adults.

Again, who is baptizing unrepented unbelievers? I have never seen that in 40 years.

That is why Peter added repentance in Acts 2:38. So, believe per Mark 16:16, then repent per Acts 2:38, and be baptized per Mark 16:16 and Acts 2:38, then.... These verses nicely accommodate each other.

No, to deal with himself. Only little children do that, unless these adults have mental insecurities. When we baptized, we tell them "....in the name of Jesus for the remission of your sins", then SPLASH! They know what they are doing. Do you fellers even teach repent and be baptized, or...

But they believe in what they are doing. My question stands, why would someone get baptized that does not believe? Surely Jesus was not so uninformed as to assume that in Mark 16:16? Christians think Jesus meant this..."he that does not believe and is baptized...". Fact is, Jesus KNEW only a...